Who the fuck cares about all of this as long as the man's team is making good games? What, we all gotta get a reach-around just the exact way we want it, too?

Yes, I understand it's the internet. Most of the people bitching wouldn't have bothered to play this game even if he didn't supposedly make all of these "mistakes"... which don't matter if you MAKE A GOOD GAME. It's not like we're exactly drowning in high-quality old-school adventure games.

The problem isn't that NFS Rivals doesn't support wheels; it's that it's such an arcade game that trying to support a wheel would be a silly idea.

Rivals seems like a decent game despite its obvious technical limitations, but I really wish they EA would just chill out on the NFS and diversify. Go back to Burnout and have Criterion make one. Go the sim route and get some crazy sim company to make one with the proper car licensing to get the best of both worlds (physics/realism AND a stable of great licensed cars to drive).

Of course, NFS sells the vast majority of copies on consoles, so that's where they'll focus most of their attention. (And I kind of doubt that supporting wheels and 60fps will shift that balance away, as the arcadey design does prove to sell more copies overall when you add up all the platforms, and the console gamers' money spends just as well as PC gamers' money does.)

ColoradoHoudini wrote on Sep 20, 2013, 20:14:i am patiently waiting for a AAA title to come out for the PC where we can go back to our glory days of map making, game modding, and personally-owned servers. That HAS to happen again, right?

They're around. Just not in the games that cost eight or nine figures to make.

In my informal view, I agree. When people rage, they're not learning from their loss - and anyone in competitive gaming or even in many sports will tell you that there's usually more to be learned from a loss than from a win. If you're not in the mindset to absorb that information, then you don't improve, and the people who can emotionally handle losing will have their logic centers engaged, rather than turned off, and will learn things.

I just couldn't understand why they made the cap on item prices $250. That's a ridiculous number. $2.50 would have been much more reasonable.

Even then, any $ amount shows a basic failure in itemization design and I refuse to play a Diablo III with a real-money auction house as a result. Hell, even a gold auction house bugs me. I'm actually thinking of picking up D3 on consoles for some casual living room play since it lacks the RMAH, although I'd want to find out more about whether the drop rates were change to adjust for the lack of the auction house.

Cutter wrote on Sep 3, 2013, 13:11:Yes, it's exactly like that. Regardless of the codes, it's still just sitting around paying to watch advertising.

"Yes, once I take the liberty of setting aside anything inconvenient that disproves my point, *reiterates my point*"

You're wrong and I have the facts on my side (you don't have to pay to watch and you do get things that aren't advertisements) but I've been around here long enough to know that you're ridiculously hard-headed and not worth trying to convince. So at this point I'm just trying to set the record straight for anyone else wondering what this is about.

Pretty sure everyone will still be able to watch, but it's likely that HD quality and the bonus stuff only come for those who subscribe.

Basically, Twitch has NEVER put anything entirely behind a paywall. There's always a free option for a livestream. I think Gearbox would be stupid to try it, and I seriously doubt Twitch would actually go along with it.

I think the reason why the Kotaku writers that have been on this story are acting upset about this is that Prey 2 was not just released but actually shown to the press, who then wrote about it and got their readers at least a little hyped for the game. To them, that puts at least some responsibility into the hands of Bethesda to deliver on the "story" of Prey 2. And right now, the story has started over and the effort put in is being thrown out. Sure, there are many harder jobs out there than Game Journalist, but it's still work and it's frustrating to have to tell one's readers that they have to stow that hype and push aside anything they remember about the game because the publisher is quietly throwing it out. (Publishers do things like this all the time but the difference is that they don't do it in this way.)

Creston wrote on Aug 14, 2013, 18:14:I'm sure we'll see a next-gen version come out before March 2014.

Would you have been sure of the same thing for the 360/PS3 and San Andreas? The Xbox version of GTA:SA was released only a few months before the 360 was, after all, and look what happened there: Rockstar moved on from SA and took years to release a next-gen GTA. (It was available via backwards compatibility, I guess, but I remember it running kind of like shit.)

I'm not saying it ain't gonna happen, just that it's a big possibility that it won't.

For those wondering why GTAV is not coming to PS4/XB1 anytime soon, consider that they started development of this game years ago, before those consoles were even close to being finalized. Plus, if your game has the potential to sell 15 million copies on consoles, why would you release it on consoles that have a 3 million-ish install base at maximum by year's end? That's not even "bad business" - that's just stupid.

Simply put, a console at launch is at its weakest and most fragile state: the install base has to build from zero, and game publishers don't want to waste money putting games on it just trying to build the install base. After all, that's not their responsibility, it's the responsibility of the people who made the console. Even the console manufacturers want to hold back their biggest franchises, which is why there is no Halo, Gears, Uncharted, or Gran Turismo coming to the new consoles anytime soon. Instead, we get franchises that are celebrated but aren't stellar sellers - like inFAMOUS, Killzone, and Forza. Console manufacturers have to look like they're coming out strong while actually doing the exact opposite.

Notch and Mojand could easily afford the cash to patch Minecraft on XBLA nearly as many times as he wanted, and the game'd still make them huge bank. Plus, it had already sold millions on PC. That's a pretty safe bet, bringing it to Xbox.

Fez was always a bit of a niche title, no matter how good it was ever going to be, and it launched on Xbox, stuck in exclusivity as MS basically buried it deep down in Xbox Live. (Not on purpose, but just with negligence)

There's a reason most indie developers are bailing from Xbox. It's a poisonous environment for a small team without corporate funding, putting their first for-money game on a digital download service.

Gadzooks wrote on Jun 25, 2013, 13:09:Wish they would just start making Borderlands 3 already. These DLCs are just like appetizers for awesome.

This development style actually fits in well. Designers, musicians, and artists do a relatively small amount of work when a game's being concepted out early, while engine programmers and studio heads deal with the very basic design philosophies of the next game. And while those content creators are waiting for a game's basic tech and designs to really take shape, they can work on DLC for the existing game. Otherwise, you'd see even more stories of layoffs as nearly all developers swell and shrink due to only having one project going at a time. (Of course, for those studios that do swell and shrink anyuway, we hear about the layoffs but the hirings that happen years before don't also make the news, but that's just game industry reporting for you.)